Bernard Lang writes:
>
>right ...
>
> why not erase all historical mistakes from the history books ... so
>that we can learn only how thing should go, and not how they can go
>wrong.
I was not speaking of books nor peer reviewed 'published' papers, but
rather 'preprints' aka working papers. That is a different issue.
Bob
>
>Bernard
>
>
>On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 02:57:02PM -0500, David Goodman wrote:
>> If they disappear others may well make the same mistake. But if they
>> continue to exist, with the error noted, people will learn from
>> them (embarrassing as it may prove to be for the authors of the example).
>>
>> Bob Parks wrote:
>>
>> > ... There are some papers which prove to be wrong, even
>> > though there was considerable thought put into them - and possibly
>> > they should, as much as possible, disappear.
>> ...
>> >
>> > >bp> Maybe not for other professions, but certainly in economics, business,
>> > >bp> and political science (subjects about which I have knowledge).
>> > >
>> > >I am sure this was the practise and expectation in paper days, when
>> > >drafts were sent only to specific trusted colleagues, but it is a fact
>> > >that public posting on the Web is (like publication) another ball-game
>> > >(a bit more like guassian roulette).
>> >
>> > YES, again I agree.
>> >
>> > >bp> The persistent URL should, as with arXiv, point to the most recent
>> > >bp> draft and penultimate drafts should be in the trash.
>> > >
>> > >That is an option that should be available, but its use should be
>> > >strongly discouraged. Better to selectively email the potentially
>> > >embarrassing drafts, intended to be forgotten, and self-archive only the
>> > >ones one feels one can live with being seen publicly (and potentially
>> > >remembered and referred to forever). It is, after all, something of an
>> > >antidote to unwelcome citing and quoting to be able to point to the
>> > >extant draft and say: "See, it said 'temporary draft, to be revised, do
>> > >not cite or quote'...."
>> >
>> > As above, we might have a bit of disagreement about how strongly
>> > one discourages removal, but I think we are in agreement.
>> >
>> > And again, it is not the "potentially embarrassing drafts,
>> > intended to be forgotten," but rather any 'draft'. I would certainly
>> > not want to revert to the mailing of drafts - but maybe I make a
>> > whole lot more mistakes than you do and that is the reason that we
>> > slightly disagree.
>> >
>> > >(Ceterum censeo: This is all irrelevant to the issue of open access,
>> > >which is mainly about open access to the research literature after peer
>> > >review. How early a draft one wishes to make openly accessible before
>> > >peer review is a matter for the author to decide. But open access should
>> > >in general be thought of as being forever.)
>> >
>> > Ah, mea culpa. My open access (moa?) concerns both pre peer review
>> > and post peer review. In economics, where lags between submission and
>> > acceptance are large, require an open access working paper culture.
>> >
>> > I fully agree that the post peer review literature ought to be
>> > persistant. If corrections are needed, then errata should be posted
>> > (and linked).
>> >
>> > Gee, now that we nearly completely agree, one of us isn't needed.
>> > I hope its me.
>> >
>> > (;-)
>> >
>> > Bob
>> >
>> > *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
>> > # Economics Working Paper Archive #
>> > # http://econwpa.wustl.edu/wpawelcome.html #
>> > # gopher econwpa.wustl.edu #
>> > # #
>> > # Send a mail message (empty body) #
>> > # To: econ-wp_at_econwpa.wustl.edu #
>> > # Subject: get announce #
>> > *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
>> > Always remember: inertia has no effect on the ultimate steady state solution.
>> > NEVER remember: Keynes said in the long run we are all dead.
>> > *--------------------------------------------------------------------------*
>> > | Bob Parks Voice: (314) 935-5665 |
>> > | Department of Economics, Campus Box 1208 Fax: (314) 935-4156 |
>> > | Washington University |
>> > | One Brookings Drive |
>> > | St. Louis, Missouri 63130-4899 bparks_at_wuecona.wustl.edu|
>> > *--------------------------------------------------------------------------*
>> >
>>
>> Dr. David Goodman
>> Biological Sciences Bibliographer
>> Princeton University Library
>> dgoodman_at_princeton.edu
>
>--
> Non aux Brevets Logiciels - No to Software Patents
> SIGNEZ http://petition.eurolinux.org/ SIGN
>
>Bernard.Lang_at_inria.fr ,_ /\o \o/ Tel +33 1 3963 5644
>http://pauillac.inria.fr/~lang/ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Fax +33 1 3963 5469
> INRIA / B.P. 105 / 78153 Le Chesnay CEDEX / France
> Je n'exprime que mon opinion - I express only my opinion
> CAGED BEHIND WINDOWS or FREE WITH LINUX
>
--
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
# Economics Working Paper Archive #
# http://econwpa.wustl.edu/wpawelcome.html #
# gopher econwpa.wustl.edu #
# #
# Send a mail message (empty body) #
# To: econ-wp_at_econwpa.wustl.edu #
# Subject: get announce #
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Always remember: inertia has no effect on the ultimate steady state solution.
NEVER remember: Keynes said in the long run we are all dead.
*--------------------------------------------------------------------------*
| Bob Parks Voice: (314) 935-5665 |
| Department of Economics, Campus Box 1208 Fax: (314) 935-4156 |
| Washington University |
| One Brookings Drive |
| St. Louis, Missouri 63130-4899 bparks_at_wuecona.wustl.edu|
*--------------------------------------------------------------------------*
Received on Mon Dec 09 2002 - 22:55:03 GMT